Not when each class just has 2 choices when it comes to which weapon they can use.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Dual Wielding warrior was boring and rather horrid to play. It served no point.
edit: and the lack of healing spells is actually quite liberating since it means I no longer have to have a healer mage with me at all times, just a mage that knows Barrier, which seems like it costs a lot less for mages to learn.
I think BioWare are partially to blame, in a way. They did ultimately get people hopes up of an Origins 2 of some sorts without being entirely honest about the new direction they're taking.
I actually prefer the gameplay style that DAI is aiming for, but it makes me laugh how they've gone completely away from DAO while claiming the opposite. I guess when they said "taking the best aspects of DAO" they meant the tactical camera and nothing else.
Really for some people, just go learn to mod DAO and create your own stories in it. If all you want is that basically same game played over and over and over and over then fine. Lovely but the world didn't begin with that and it certainly wasn't mean to stop there.
No, healing spells. Oh well. There is another way to run combat. I'm sorry spirit healer was your thing but shapeshifter was mine and that option is gone too (not really shape shifting sucked but the principle is the same).
Only 8 .... Well when BG2 was the alpha and omega of cRPGs if you hadn't memorized a spell you couldn't access it during the day in one of the dumbest mechanics in gaming history. So, no access to all your abilities has been done and we all lived to tell the tale.
Weapon restrictions...seriously? Do we need to even wade into clerics can't shed blood but can crush your skull? Or mages can't use swords for...well I don't even know if anyone tries to explain that. Again, been done we are all okand could play BG2 and feel good about things not being dumbed down
You can memorize more than eight spells in BG2 by the start of the game, if you're a single-class caster.
And like I said before, DA2 had more viable character build options, not less, for non-mages at least.
And DAI appears to have significantly less than DA2.
Not when each class just has 2 choices when it comes to which weapon they can use.
2 choices?? My warrior can use a 2handed sword, a 2 handed axe, a 2handed war hammer, a 1 handed of each, a shield, etc. What 2 choices are you referring to?
I also personally question this. Realistically speaking, did you ever end up giving Leliana two swords or maces, or Alistair a staff?
The only thing I find annoying is the lack of duel wielding swords, but I do realize there was almost little distinction between that and the regular duel wielding rogue. Sure its technically stripping down features, but one that didn't have too many practical uses.
Most of my rogues had full weapon + small weapon for melee. My archers equipped them in the second weapon set, and had tactics so that when someone ran up and started hacking them in the face, they could switch to melee weapons and defend themselves.
None of which you can do in DAI. Because, you know, tactical.
That support tree looks far more interesting than anything we had in the previous games.
Now we actually have think about what support spells to use rather than just spamming heal and group heal on everything repeatedly. God forbid we might have to actually mix things up and focus on preventing damage rather than mashing the heal button.
You can memorize more than eight spells in BG2 by the start of the game, if you're a single-class caster.
Vancian casting system is different. How many times are you going to cast before resting?
I said Diablo 3 + a tactical cam. No auto attack either, by the way. Button mashing. The combat animations even look like Diablo 3. I have seen tactics being mentioned by the Diablo 3 developers too. Doesn't mean it ended up being very nessecary. If you push it abit, you can call "wich button to press next" = tactics.
And what about player switching? DA:I has much more than just combat, not quite the same for Diablo 3. Why are you trying to simplify the basic mechanics into a few words? The combat animations look about as much like Diablo 3 as it does Dark Souls.
I actually prefer the gameplay style that DAI is aiming for, but it makes me laugh how they've gone completely away from DAO while claiming the opposite. I guess when they said "taking the best aspects of DAO" they meant the tactical camera and nothing else.
Well there's also the crafting, which is actually better than DAO, but also seriously misconceived as an rpg element.
"DAO would never stoop so low as fetch quests" was specifically brought up as a pre-emptive criticism of DAI. Well, it DID stoop that low, and frequently. When a challenge like that is made, do you think no one will answer it?So this thread has turned into "lets tear down Origins to prop-up Inquisition"...yikes.
Origins is one of the most heralded games of the last decade and you people are dragging it through the mud in defense of a game that is a complete question-mark at this point.
And DAI appears to have significantly less than DA2.
Significantly less? It has melee Mages, that were absent in DA2. What else is different from there?
Looking at those screens one thing is just jarring...
Must EVERYTHING be tied to barrier in mage passive abilities?
It's everywhere!
Barrier is just one spell and it works with passive abilities all over mage class. They are practicly shoving barrier down our throat.
I could play DAO and DA2 without dedicated healing companion, but now it looks like barrier is not only mandatory, but also enforced in the design.
I also personally question this. Realistically speaking, did you ever end up giving Leliana two swords or maces, or Alistair a staff?
The only thing I find annoying is the lack of duel wielding swords, but I do realize there was almost little distinction between that and the regular duel wielding rogue. Sure its technically stripping down features, but one that didn't have too many practical uses.
Ya, I have no idea why they are determined to call their weapons daggers. At one point in DA2 I was using a pick, axe, rapier, short sword, and ya, sometimes a dagger. Dagger is the murder knife... Dagger has no relative meaning in Thedas apparently, it's funny and really odd they stuck to the dagger moniker for all the weapons you actually use.
I also personally question this. Realistically speaking, did you ever end up giving Leliana two swords or maces, or Alistair a staff?
The only thing I find annoying is the lack of duel wielding swords, but I do realize there was almost little distinction between that and the regular duel wielding rogue. Sure its technically stripping down features, but one that didn't have too many practical uses.
I gave Leliana 2 swords all the time. I felt the archery in the game was a bit dull.
I also gave Wynne a two handed axe once. My favorite memory from that game was watching her do a finishing move on Kolgrim with it.
I had Oghren dual wield axes quite often too.
Looking at those screens one thing is just jarring...
Must EVERYTHING be tied to barrier in mage passive abilities?
It's everywhere!
Barrier is just one spell and it works with passive abilities all over mage class. They are practicly shoving barrier down our throat.
I could play DAO and DA2 without dedicated healing companion, but now it looks like barrier is not only mandatory, but also enforced in the design.
If the healing system became an absorb system based on Barrier-like abilities, what did you expect?
Looking at those screens one thing is just jarring...
Must EVERYTHING be tied to barrier in mage passive abilities?
It's everywhere!
Barrier is just one spell and it works with passive abilities all over mage class. They are practicly shoving barrier down our throat.
I could play DAO and DA2 without dedicated healing companion, but now it looks like barrier is not only mandatory, but also enforced in the design.
By the looks of it, the game is designed to not even need a mage at all now(although you could get away with that in DA2 and DAO it wanst as easy).
Some people will like the game and other won't.
The thing is with the DA franchise , a lot of things tends to change between games.
It's almost like they reboot the franchise everytime .
And I can guarantee some people won't like some of DAI changes.
For people who likes the old system where there wasn't a lot of filler content , and it was mostly talk/RP choice/DO quests/Talk /RP choice...I can imagine how DAI can be problematic.
The old system is still there but there's also lots of small fetch quest enhancing the local theme of the map , puzzle mini games , gathering ressources , closing all the small fade rifts, claiming camps and important places...etc...
From what I saw in different videos you will need to do a bit of those to gain powers/influence but quite frankly power/influence was popping all over the place so it shouldn't require too much farming.
This mechanic of doing those different things to unlock story content won't please everyone , before you didn't need to do that afterall...
I don't have much of a problem with it , but I'm cautious about the result.
If the content is good or not mandatory when it becomes boring , it's not a problem.
But I know closing those fade rifts is going to get old after a while for example.
The filler content and fetch quests were just as prevalent in DAO!
I actually prefer the gameplay style that DAI is aiming for, but it makes me laugh how they've gone completely away from DAO while claiming the opposite. I guess when they said "taking the best aspects of DAO" they meant the tactical camera and nothing else.
Hardly. Off the top of my head there's also the customization, return of multiple playable races, a large variety of locations, being able to talk to your companions at any time in the story rather than fixed intervals, actually being able to change your companions armour...
Rebutting the lack of healing with the one healing ability is missing the point.
DAI lacking heals is NOT a flaw, it's a different design. It's not like DAI takes the DAO combat and removes all the healing spells, so either you use potions or you die. It's not that at all, instead they added a whole new system of "temporary" hit points to compensate, with Barrier and Guard. This adds a completely different dimension to the combat, where you need to manage your temporary health to minimize battle attrition.
Of course, it also adds a completely different dynamic to encounter design: battles in DAI are no longer design to wipe the party at every turn. Rather, the challenge is in minimizing attrition, so as to be able to handle later encounters.
Quite frankly, I think those who complain about the lack of healing are doing it wrong. They're fighting like they're playing DAO or DA2, instead of fighting as they should be. It's a complete paradigm shift, quite frankly, and one that looks very interesting: instead of fighting and then healing your characters, you must defend your characters and THEN fight.
It's proactive combat instead of reactive, and I have a feeling people who complain about healing just haven't adjusted yet.
Significantly less? It has melee Mages, that were absent in DA2. What else is different from there?
Not really. Unless you're a Knight-Enchanter, and even then you still can't hit people with your stick no matter how many blades you slap onto it.
Most of my rogues had full weapon + small weapon for melee. My archers equipped them in the second weapon set, and had tactics so that when someone ran up and started hacking them in the face, they could switch to melee weapons and defend themselves.
None of which you can do in DAI. Because, you know, tactical.
Fair enough, but weren't archers given melee responses for when enemies got too close? you pretty much end with the same result.
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Dual Wielding warrior was boring and rather horrid to play. It served no point.
edit: and the lack of healing spells is actually quite liberating since it means I no longer have to have a healer mage with me at all times, just a mage that knows Barrier, which seems like it costs a lot less for mages to learn.
Then you had the option not to play dual wielding warriors. Since you didn't like it, everyone else should have the option removed? So that everyone is forced to play exactly like you do?
Now you will just have to have a mage who knows Barrier, instead of a heal spell. Either way you are forced to bring one.
Significantly less? It has melee Mages, that were absent in DA2. What else is different from there?
The reduction in non elemental base trees, no blood magic or spirit healer, the fact that the spec trees have less in them than the DA2 specs and we can only choose 1 despite BW stating ages ago when revealing that we could only choose 1 that it would be OK because the spec trees would have more depth.
Retour en haut
